MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           26 February 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001060124

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Robert J. McGowan		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr . Raymond J. Wagner		Member	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	     advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, reconsideration of his request for correction of his military record by promoting him to Chief Warrant Officer Three (CW3) for retirement purposes, and by sending him, as a retiree, to the Maintenance Test Pilot (MTP) course.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was prevented from attending a very important, career-enhancing school and denied promotion to CW3 because of unfounded allegations that were made against him.  He adds that the Officer Special Review Board (OSRB) removed an adverse Officer Evaluation Report (OER) from his record, in effect, dispelling the allegations that forced him to retire.  He states that there is an on-going "whistleblower" investigation being conducted by the Department of Defense (DOD) Inspector General's Office (IG).

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 8 June 2000 (AR2000037156, COPY ATTACHED).  The applicant has also submitted a memorandum, dated 4 October 2000, from Appeals and Corrections Branch, US Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM), informing him that his OER appeal was granted; and a 23 June 2000 letter from this Board forwarding the Board's Memorandum of Consideration of his original case.

The applicant received, and appealed, an adverse OER for the period 980902-990222.  He was also a two-time nonselect for promotion to CW3 by the May 1999 CW3 Promotion Board.  He was notified that, unless he chose voluntary retirement, he would be mandatorily retired.  He chose voluntary retirement and was separated on 31 January 2000 by reason of sufficient service for retirement.  He retired as a CW2.

On 3 October 2000, the OSRB approved the applicant's appeal of his OER for the period 980902-990222 and removed it from his record.  The OSRB noted that the subject OER played no role in the applicant's nonselection for promotion to CW3 as the May 1999 CW3 Promotion Board did not see the report.  The OSRB did not direct promotion reconsideration.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

2.  As stated in this Board's initial review of the applicant's case, his performance record did not show the applicant to be one of the best qualified warrant officers for promotion to CW3.  Although the subject OER certainly would have added to the body of evidence supporting his nonselection for promotion to CW3, it played no part in that process because the promotion board did not see it.

3.  The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__JL____  __RTD __  __RJW__  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AC2001060124	
SUFFIX		
RECON	20000608	
DATE BOARDED	20020226	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	131.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.